APJis a reader-supported journal Tax deductible Contributions welcome via Pay Pal or credit card. If you would like to support the Journal, please do so here. The Asia-Pacific Journal is available free to all. Your support allows us to improve our service in a new era of conflict in the Asia-Pacific. Donate: $25.00$50.00$100.00

Although Japan and Britain are both island nations, they are worldsapart--not just geographically, but in their approach to the threatof terrorism.

Both governments became targets of al-Qaida for supporting theU.S.-led war against terror. The two countries are now tighteningimmigration controls in their battle against terrorism.

While the measures being introduced are similar, the intensity ofdebate over related legal revisions is like oil and water.

In May, Japan's Diet passed a bill requiring all foreign nationalsaged 16 or over--with the exception of state guests and those withspecial permanent resident status--to be fingerprinted andphotographed upon arrival.

Despite the controversial nature of the legislation, debate in theDiet was low-key. Interest among the general public was lukewarm, atbest.

In March, Britain passed legislation requiring all passports tocontain biometric data such as irises and fingerprints. But thattranspired only after heated debate and repeated revisions andrejections.

British immigration control officers started using iris recognitionon an experimental basis that same month.

However, with continuing dissent and a general election slated for2009, it is possible--if the ruling Labor Party is trounced--thatthe new system will be scrapped as it is not due to be in placeuntil 2010.

Japan's system changes have much in common with those in Britain,including exercising tighter controls on foreign nationals and theuse of fingerprinting.

Meanwhile, Japanese and foreign residents of Japan with ID cardsembedded with fingerprint data will be able to use fast-track bordercontrol checks operated by automatic gates.

Anybody found to have ties with terrorist groups will be deported.

During the Diet debate, opposition Minshuto (Democratic Party ofJapan) called for caution and more time for deliberations on theissue.

Proposed revisions included a clearly worded statement that personalinformation such as fingerprints would not be used for purposesother than immigration control.

Opposition lawmakers also expressed concerns about using the U.S.firm Accenture to set up the new border control system usingbiometric data. They said they feared data recorded in Japan mightbecome available in the United States.

Last fall, Accenture won a bid for only 100,000 yen to develop anexperimental system that allows holders of IC cards with fingerprintdata to pass through automatically operated immigration gates.

Accenture also developed the fingerprint data-management system For the U.S. government that tracks all foreign nationals entering thecountry.

The U.S. firm is also involved in the development of systems for taxauthorities and public prosecutors in Japan.

The government dismissed concerns of possible data leaks with thepromise that it would "strictly control data in line with the law."

Kono Taro, senior vice minister of justice, stated a pressing needfor the new legislation, saying: "We can't afford to be leisurelyabout this. There were terrorist attacks in Bali and in London, andal-Qaida is said to be targeting Japan, too."

The bill proposed by the government was endorsed on May 17.

The revisions to the Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Law stirred little public interest in part because most Japanese assumethe changes have nothing to do with themselves, experts said.

Japanese nationals are excluded from the fingerprint requirement. An estimated 470,000 non-Japanese with special resident status are alsoexempt.

Most of those with special resident status are Koreans who came toJapan before and during World War II. Their descendants also fallinto this category.

"It was a decision as a matter of policy," a senior Justice Ministryofficial explained.

The decision to exclude them from the new requirements stemmed From fears of a severe backlash from the Korean community, sources said.

Mizukami Yoichiro, 64, former director of the Tokyo ImmigrationBureau, said he believes the fingerprinting requirement runs counterto Japan's national interest in that it will hinder efforts to co-exist peacefully with others.

With this in mind, he asked an executive official of pro-SeoulKorean Residents Union in Japan (Mindan) if he minded receivingpreferential treatment.

The executive apparently was bewildered.

In the 1980s, second- and third-generation Korean residentsspearheaded a movement against the fingerprint requirement for alienregistration.

Kim Sang Sa, 34, a third-generation Korean resident, acknowledgedthe Korean community was slow to react this time around.

"We started to move in March after we learned the details of theproposed bill," he said. "But we ran out of time when the bill wasapproved."

Kang Sang Jung, a professor of political science at the Universityof Tokyo, says the revision is a reflection of the "anxiety syndrome" that he believes is gripping Japan.

"Security attracts attention, and people are increasingly seeingforeigners as targets for risk management," he says.

Kang, a second-generation Korean resident, had his fingerprintstaken for alien registration at the age of 16. Later, he refused tobe fingerprinted.

"In Europe and the United States, moves to tighten control like thiswould surely face opposition because of human rights concerns," hesays. "Crime prevention is important, but we need to hammer out abalance in conflicts between order and our rights."

Yoshinari Katsuo, 55, a former representative of the Asian People'sFriendship Society, voiced sadness that Japanese seem to generallyregard the new legislation as "somebody else's problem."

Yoshinari noted that foreign nationals residing in Japan werebasically kept in the dark, with the result that most foreignersassumed the new legislation would only affect new arrivals--which isfar from the case.

"So far, Japan has been a comfortable place for foreigners to livein," said Pakistani Nusrat Ali, a 44-year-old long-term Japanresident. "But from now on, you'll be treated like a criminal simplybecause you are a foreigner."

In Britain, meantime, the Labor government clashed head-on withopposition parties over border control revisions and anti-terrorismlegislation.

Following last July's terrorist attacks, Prime Minister Tony Blairdeclared that the "rules of the game are changing" and went on topropose steps that would make it easier to expel foreign criminals.

But his administration's plan to introduce ID cards with biometricdata met with strong opposition both from the left-of-center LiberalDemocrats and, on the right, the Conservative Party.

Critics fear police may take advantage of the new ID card as a meansto crack down on illegal immigrants, thereby fueling racial tensions, or that it may lead to the leak--and abuse--of personal information. Another factor is cost.

Miyajima Takashi, professor of sociology at Hosei University'sgraduate school, attributes the difference in public perceptionsbetween Japan and Britain to the two countries' experience withimmigrants.

Miyajima notes one in 10 British citizens is an immigrant or adescendant of one.

When problems arise with a foreign country, the immigrant populationserves as a "bridge," linking the British to other nations.

That, he says, explains the British tendency to believe thatproblems facing foreigners also concern them.

"On the other hand, Japan has only a short history of acceptingforeigners," he says. "The Japanese don't share foreigners' opinionsand tend to regard them as 'not directly related to us.'"

This article appeared in the IHT/Asahi Shimbun on July 25, 2006.Posted at Japan Focus on August 3, 2006.

We welcome your comments on this and all other articles. More are available on our homepage. Please consider subscribing to our email newsletter or RSS feed, or following us via Twitter or Facebook.